Attack ads can be effective, but does Patrick Brown have the right formula?

During the U.S. presidential election campaign, Donald Trump was fond of calling Hillary Clinton “Crooked Hillary.” This nasty name calling was used by Trump as a way of defining his opponents. You remember: “Lyin’ Ted,” “Little Marco,” “Crazy Bernie”.

It worked for Trump. But will it work for Ontario Progressive Conservative Leader Patrick Brown?

Brown unleashed a two-pronged ad campaign well in advance of the June 2018 provincial election. The ad campaign conveniently coincided with two high-profile political trials. One involved criminal charges against two aides of Premier Kathleen Wynne’s predecessor, Dalton McGuinty. In the other, alleged violations of the Elections Act by a former staffer for Premier Kathleen Wynne and a local party fundraiser were later dismissed by the judge.

The first series of ads featured Brown talking about the economy, diversity and families. But what drew my attention was his party’s Trump-like attack ad, which appeared on primetime TV. It accuses Wynne of being “untrustworthy” and implies she’s a liar, only one step removed from being crooked.

Wynne and the Liberals haven’t run attack ads against Brown at this point, although third parties have targeted him.

The PC ad features a still, stone-faced Wynne being vilified by a menacing, deep, male voice. The narrator says, “Kathleen Wynne is untrustworthy. Her Liberal party is politically corrupt . . . Now the premier is testifying at a bribery trial . . . Just imagine what’s next.” It concludes by saying, “Wynne will say anything to get elected. You can’t trust her or them ever again.”

Research shows attack ads can be effective. They can also backfire.

In the leadup to the 2014 federal election, the Harper Conservatives tried to define Justin Trudeau in a series of hard-hitting ads. They claimed Trudeau was “not ready,” “in over his head” and a political neophyte incapable of running the country now or ever. A poll conducted by Forum Research later found the campaign failed, badly. Half of the voters who saw the ads said they made them more likely to vote Liberal. Less than 20 per cent said the ads inclined them to vote Conservative.

Brown’s office is now full of former Harper aides who seem to have forgotten why their Trudeau TV ads rebounded so badly.

Successful attack ads rarely deal with policy issues. Instead they focus on underlying character flaws that will resonate with voters. Trudeau’s inexperience was seen by many viewers as a correctable flaw, not a character weakness.

In the early Wynne ads, the PCs try to label her as “untrustworthy” — but largely because of McGuinty-era failures: eHealth, the gas plants cancellations and trials involving McGuinty staffers. I doubt viewers see McGuinty’s mistakes as core Wynne character flaws or personal weaknesses. Maybe that’s why the most recent versions have focused on rising hydro rates.

If “untrustworthy” is really code for “she’s a woman, and she’s gay,” the electorate will respond the same way they did to the Chretien attack ads that highlighted his facial sag and slur. There will be an overwhelming backlash.

The most effective attack ads also come from a source with moral authority. The Harper attacks on Trudeau failed in part because they were emanating from a spent prime minister immersed in a Senate scandal, claiming he didn’t know what was going on in his own office.

Brown has emerged as PC leader with considerable baggage of his own. As a Harper MP he opposed gay marriage, abortion and a carbon tax. As Ontario PC leader, he’s had a change of heart on all these issues. So it appears it’s Brown who will say almost anything to get elected.

The content of an effective attack ad has to be believable. One of the Trudeau ads depicted him stripping to the waist and looking like a buffoon with good hair. However, viewers quickly learned the clip was Trudeau raising money at a charity event.

The Wynne ad plays out on a dark, ominous background. It’s accompanied by the sound of a jail door clanking closed, leaving the impression Wynne should be jailed — echoing the Trump rally chant of “Lock her up” without saying so directly. Brown has also refused to apologize for saying Wynne “stands trial” in the Election Act court case when in fact Wynne was only testifying at the trial of others. Taken together, the PCs’ campaign is moving beyond believable.

Attack ads are used mostly to rally the base of a party. They energize those who are excited by confrontational politics. They use anger and fear to prompt members to contribute money and get out and vote.

They don’t work as well on informed voters, who see them as dumbing down policy alternatives in favour of character assassination. Brown has to be careful his staff’s Trumpesque tendencies don’t backfire the way they did with Harper.

Let’s hope the next election is a fight of competing ideas and direction for Ontario. And that it doesn’t descend into a slugfest of personal attacks and recrimination.